Technic 2023 Set Discussion

[Maaboo the Witch]

5 hours ago, Ngoc Nguyen said:

Also there's info about a technic polybag with 78 pieces.

Apparently that's a forklift truck with a pallet.

[Ngoc Nguyen]

Anyhow, I have this theory regarding the upcoming Fire Plane. in 2015, when the tapered panel was introduced, we get the Fire Plane 42040 with 7 of that new panel. In 2018, we get the 42066 Jet with 10 of that panels in black for the first time and 4 in medium blue. 

It seems like whenever TLG wants to introduce a new color in a slanted/tapered panel, they'd release a plane. So I guess the upcoming Fire Plane will have lots of tapered panels in the new neon yellow color.

[AVCampos]

I'm still undecided whether I like neon yellow or not because, on one hand, yet another shade makes amassing enough parts in one colour to MOC with harder; on the other, fluorescence!

[Maaboo the Witch]

2 hours ago, AVCampos said:

I'm still undecided whether I like neon yellow or not because, on one hand, yet another shade makes amassing enough parts in one colour to MOC with harder; on the other, fluorescence!

Also, I'd imagine losing a fluorescent part is fairly difficult.

[LvdH]

At first I thought the Peugeot was black but it’s clearly a lighter shade. So there’s a pretty good chance we will get a nice selection of DBG panels. Hopefully the “Osprey” panels will be returning in that case.

[Lyichir]

6 hours ago, AVCampos said:

I'm still undecided whether I like neon yellow or not because, on one hand, yet another shade makes amassing enough parts in one colour to MOC with harder; on the other, fluorescence!

So far the neon yellow hasn't really been used as the primary color of any models, it's mostly been used for accents (not just in Technic but also in other themes like City and Monkie Kid). If that remains the case, I doubt it will really impact the widespread availability of classic yellow parts, and as an accent color it's less of an issue if only a small-ish selection of parts are available in the new neon yellow color.

[Jundis]

Just looked at the list again and the BatCycle could be a cool looking model and a great parts pack for bike enthusiasts. I also found this article, whicht quotes:

"The engine is actually two BMW boxer motors, deconstructed and stacked on top of each other."

But I don't even expect a gearbox in the Lego model as there simple is not enough room. I think the rear tire and black rims from the 10269 would fit nicely. Also black shock absorbers can be expected. I wonder if TLC will do the scaffolded frame under the seat.

Source: https://bunker158.com

[Maaboo the Witch]

Also, the Monster Jam trucks. Who's gonna be coming in from the left, and who's gonna be coming in from the right?

[MarkyMark42]

I think this is the first time I've really noticed things being this quiet regarding the upcoming wave of sets.

Is it a case of there's just a lack of new info? And is that normal for this time of year?

Or is it a lack of general enthusiasm for the sets to come?

[kbalage]

First image leaks happened around this time last year, mid-November the previous year, so I guess the topic will become "interesting" again when they will appear. 

[allanp]

Agreed. Personally I've never been excited by just the subject matter of a model, but by the way that subject matter has been recreated, and you can't really tell that from just a name. Pictures help but even then I want to know more about the novelties on the insides more than the outside.

Edited October 27, 2022 by allanp

[howitzer]

54 minutes ago, allanp said:

Agreed. Personally I've never been excited by just the subject matter of a model, but by the way that subject matter has been recreated, and you can't really tell that from just a name. Pictures help but even then I want to know more about the novelties on the insides more than the outside.

Same here. The first reveal of the Airbus for example was only that it would be an aircraft of some sort, which immediately raises it above the usual cars, but is still far too little of information whether it's interesting or not. It turned out to be a really great set, but that wasn't apparent until we got the first high quality photos.

[Maaboo the Witch]

6 hours ago, MarkyMark42 said:

I think this is the first time I've really noticed things being this quiet regarding the upcoming wave of sets.

Is it a case of there's just a lack of new info? And is that normal for this time of year?

Or is it a lack of general enthusiasm for the sets to come?

All of those things, I think.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Maaboo35

[Moz]

19 hours ago, MarkyMark42 said:

Or is it a lack of general enthusiasm for the sets to come?

For me it's knowing that if I want the flagship crane I'm going to have to buy a compatible phone and none of those are cheap. The Control+ and Buwizz apps don't work on my Fairphone even though Brickcontroller does (I could buy an actual controller to use with BrickController but that seems like spending half the money money to get half a solution). I'm part way converting the Volvo truck back to Power Functions and I really don't like my chances of doing that with the crane.

I think TLG really need to bring out some kind of physical controller for the Control+ stuff, because the whole Lego idea of "buy it now, your grandkids play with it in 20 years time" is completely incompatible with "buy a new phone every second year".

[kbalage]

7 hours ago, Moz said:

I think TLG really need to bring out some kind of physical controller for the Control+ stuff, because the whole Lego idea of "buy it now, your grandkids play with it in 20 years time" is completely incompatible with "buy a new phone every second year".

I agree with the physical controller part, but you really don't need a new phone to use the Control+ app. I have a Redmi 7a that was $80 2 years ago and the app runs on it without a problem. Alternatively you can use Pybricks and write code to run on the hub itself, and use the LEGO Powered Up controller with it. That one has some limitations though, as it does not offer proportional control with the buttons but that's probably not a deal breaker for a crane. 

[Jundis]

As @kbalage already talked about the roadmap (see below), can we maybe expect a physical controller, as "New LEGO Powered Up products" are mentioned in 2023 and 2025?

 

[kbalage]

6 minutes ago, Jundis said:

As @kbalage already talked about the roadmap (see below), can we maybe expect a physical controller, as "New LEGO Powered Up products" are mentioned in 2023 and 2025?

I wouldn't hold my breath for that, the "Powered Up product" most probably refers to sets like the Winter Village tram or the City Trains that require a control profile in the Powered Up app. It's not impossible though, but so far the impression was that TLG only creates Powered Up hardware if it can be sold within sets, not as a standalone product. They made many Control+ vehicles and for them app control seems to be good enough, so I'm not sure if any market research could convince them to develop a proper physical controller. 

 

[allanp]

9 hours ago, kbalage said:

I wouldn't hold my breath for that, the "Powered Up product" most probably refers to sets like the Winter Village tram or the City Trains that require a control profile in the Powered Up app. It's not impossible though, but so far the impression was that TLG only creates Powered Up hardware if it can be sold within sets, not as a standalone product. They made many Control+ vehicles and for them app control seems to be good enough, so I'm not sure if any market research could convince them to develop a proper physical controller. 

 

You could argue that before PU, PF was good enough, and before PF, 9V was good enough. I don't think "good enough" is a good enough excuse to not want to improve and fix the issues. Not having a physical controller, the need for third party smart devices and a heavy emphasis on coding are all issues that previous systems didn't have. But I understand that including a TLG made physical controller with built in touch screen/smart device in every PU set would be way too cost prohibitive and also kinda pointless, as everyone would only need one of these ultimate PU smart physical controller with built in touchscreen thingies. This is why I advocate for it to be sold as a separate accessory. It would be expensive (cost of a smart device plus cost of controller, maybe £150? 200?) but owning just one would make every PU set vastly better and solve most of its issues.

I think the coding thing is probably unavoidable to get the most potential out of the system, but it could hopefully improve in time with more dedicated and intuitive code blocks. Take steering for example. You could have a single code block which automatically deals with calibration. You can assign a button to switch between steering modes. You can also open each steering mode and assign how many steered axles there are and how each axle behaves in this mode relative to the steering slider/wheel position. So this block would let you select what you want it to do without having to code it yourself. You could also have a pneumatic controller block which lets you select how many valves it controls, how they are mixed and with extra output(s) for automatic compressors. Combine these two blocks with a simple motor driver block (for drive) and you can program a very complex machine (like a 6 axle mobile crane or a back hoe) with just 3 code blocks. You could also have a gearbox code block. Say you have a 6 speed gearbox with 3 drive rings controlled by 2 motors via wave selectors. In the gearbox code block you can select how many gears you have (select 6). 6 gears are then displayed on the code block. Select gear one to open it and then select the positions of each motor for that gear, then repeat for all gears. You can also select between sequential shifting a manual shifting. Sequential shifting would give you two buttons to place on the control screen, while manual gives you a H gate type selector with the right amount of gears to place on the control screen (which can also be used for multi function gearboxes). There could also be an option for automatic. Such configurable code blocks could cut down the need for coding quite drastically and intuitively. Of course the existing code blocks can stay for those that do like coding also.

For me the only remaining issue is lack of fast and/or more powerful motors. I know the hubs have weak sauce motor driver chips built in, but is it possible for the hubs to supply more power to more powerful motors if those motors have their own built in dedicated driver chips?

Edited October 28, 2022 by allanp

[Maaboo the Witch]

Wonder what "Technic Free Play" is.

[kbalage]

1 hour ago, Maaboo35 said:

Wonder what "Technic Free Play" is.

That's a concept to create controller interfaces in the Powered Up app that are customizable, but meanwhile they are closer to the pre-made controllers of the Control+ app. Not sure if they will try to copy the look of those as well or only the functionality, but unlike the Control+ counterparts these will be customizable.

@allanp I don't think a controller should have an integrated smart device, that would actually be something stupidly expensive and totally out of TLG's expertise. There are multiple options:

- They either create something simple like the current PU remote but with proportional joysticks and more buttons. This could be preconfigured with controller schemes for the different Technic sets, you connect it directly to the hub and control the set. If you want a custom layout then you could use it via the Powered Up app, just like you can do it today with the current remote.

- There'd be an option to create a somewhat smarter controller that can store the custom controller profiles. You could configure the profile e.g. in the Powered Up app, then sync it to the remote and use the remote directly with the hubs. 

- If they could make the VM functionality work on the hubs (running code on the hub itself), then the configuration could be stored on the hub so it could do more complex things with a dumb controller as well. The Pybricks team made it work so I'm not sure what is the challenge for TLG, but there were no promising news about this functionality so far. 

Coding in general should be way more simplified, actually the best would be a simplified interface where you configure things as you described without coding, and if someone needs more advanced functionality then they could switch to visual coding. 

About the motors, I don't think TLG will release more powerful motors again, just like they won't make dedicated outdoor RC toys anymore. For anything more powerful we'll have to rely on BuWizz and probably other 3rd parties.

[Unbrickme]

I strongly doubt LEGO will make technic sets with physical controllers. There are just too many issues that go along with them. I made a detailed video explaining why they are not the solution for technic sets.

 

[vascolp]

2 hours ago, Unbrickme said:

I strongly doubt LEGO will make technic sets with physical controllers. There are just too many issues that go along with them. I made a detailed video explaining why they are not the solution for technic sets.

Hi!

It seems to me that you are comparing a physical remote with a mobile phone (this is, a computer).
But there is no need for that, TechicHubs and CityHubs are full blown computers by them selfs.
What they lack is a general purpose input device to play with (much like a keyboard or mouse).
What is needed is a physical remote control with a few more buttons, some of them with proportional control, preferably able to connect to two or more hubs at the same time.
You would still need a standard computer or a mobile phone to configure the hub (that is, to download the apropriate program to it), but then a hub is able to play completely standalone.
This physical remote would have to have a very good design to make it useful in many different cases, but the end product wouldn´t be too complex, I guess.

Regarding your example with 42100... I guess you are right, the intelligence is on the phone... but this is the option LEGO followed. It is not the only option. Take a look at PyBricks for instance, the intelligence can completely be in the hub.

That said, I don´t know what´s in LEGOs mind :-)
 

[allanp]

@kbalage thinking about the motor thing, it could be that the current motors feel too weak because Technic has no real bearings (or good gearbox parts!) so there's too much friction which is where most of the motors power is wasted. So I want more powerful motors due to lack of bearings. However more powerful motors might lead to worn shafts and worn axle holes because....there's no bearings! So maybe it's actually bearings I'm missing more than more powerful motors?! 

You are correct in that a physical remote with built in touch screen/ble/WiFi and all the stuff needed to replace the need for third party smart device would be expensive. It's certainly the most expensive option. TLG would have to work with a smart device producer to develop it (didn't they consider working with Motorola on a project a while ago?). But my uneducated self perceives a few advantages (maybe because I'm uneducated on such things!)

1) TLG having complete control over the smart device. The smart device is currently the most complex part of the equation, TLG currently have no control over it and it potentially gives TLGs target audience of youngsters access to potentially harmful content on the internet. TLGs smart controller would necessarily have internet access over wi-fi but I imagine it wouldn't need a browser or messenger services. It would only need the ability to download TLG approved content. 

2) Control over the future. Who knows what app breaking updates will release in future on Apple, android and whatever which TLG has to keep up with. Who knows what new smart devices will release from entirely new companies which everyone will expect powered up to work with. With a dedicated smart device TLG is the one making only the necessary updates and devices. It's crazy to me that my toys can stop working by upgrading my pocket telephone. I feel like we are so used to our smart devices that we are desensitised to how weird and wrong that actually is. 

3) It could be profitable. Okay so what if it wasn't an all in one device, but two separate things. One is a regular TLG made smartphone and the other is a playstation style controller with a dock to plug the phone into. I know parents are not exactly thrilled to be supplying their children with smart phones. What if there was a basic smart phone produced by Lego, a brand that many parents trust, which runs on LEGO-OS and is meant specifically for children. That would be a big gamble for TLG but a potentially profitable one. It would also mean that the physical remote could work with your current smart device, so you wouldn't have to buy that most expensive part of it if you didn't want to.

I know I know, it's all pie in the sky wishful thinking. But I can't help feeling like TLGs reliance on there being a highly complex device out there that's totally outside of their control can't be good in the long term, as well as not having a physical remote! And like I say, I am quite uneducated on such things (I know people that are so much more knowledgeable than me about these things). Maybe I have overinflated the issues I see in my own mind when in reality they aren't big issues at all.

 

Edited October 29, 2022 by allanp

[valenciaeric]

I think they were just being cheap and looking for an excuse to cut expenses on the main items then sell the accessories as a sideline - just as Apple have done with their phones by eliminating chargers and earphones and then selling them as standalone items.

Drones and many other RC toys are provided with their own control devices while costing less than an equivalent lego set.

I have no interest or enthusiasm for the 2023 sets based on the list so far.

Edited October 29, 2022 by valenciaeric

[allanp]

30 minutes ago, vascolp said:

Hi!

It seems to me that you are comparing a physical remote with a mobile phone (this is, a computer).
But there is no need for that, TechicHubs and CityHubs are full blown computers by them selfs.
What they lack is a general purpose input device to play with (much like a keyboard or mouse).
What is needed is a physical remote control with a few more buttons, some of them with proportional control, preferably able to connect to two or more hubs at the same time.
You would still need a standard computer or a mobile phone to configure the hub (that is, to download the apropriate program to it), but then a hub is able to play completely standalone.
This physical remote would have to have a very good design to make it useful in many different cases, but the end product wouldn´t be too complex, I guess.

Regarding your example with 42100... I guess you are right, the intelligence is on the phone... but this is the option LEGO followed. It is not the only option. Take a look at PyBricks for instance, the intelligence can completely be in the hub.

That said, I don´t know what´s in LEGOs mind :-)
 

Running the program on the Lego hub, like @kbalage also mentioned is an interesting option that I don't really know enough about but it does sound good. Looking at many inexpensive game controllers, they look like they have about the right amount of inputs in a good layout. They tend to have 2 fully proportional, dual axis joysticks (4 proportional inputs ideal for controlling excavators and the like), each joystick also can be pushed (2 push buttons), a d-pad (4 push buttons) , A, B, C, D buttons (4 push buttons) and 4 trigger buttons. That's 18 inputs (including 4 proportional inputs) even on fairly cheap and basic controllers, and some can have more than that.

Edited October 29, 2022 by allanp